As far as I can see, KMail's maildir format (with folders ~/Mail/inbox/cur , etc) is incompatible with Dovecot's IMAP format (with folders ~/Mail/.inbox/cur).
I mean that if one runs an IMAP server then the directories must be in Dovecot's format, in which case they cannot be accessed by kmail running on the server with a standard Local Account.
If that is indeed the case, it seems surprising that kmail documentation does not appear to contain any warning of this.
On the other hand, if I am wrong, I would be very grateful if someone could explain how one can combine kmail + dovecot IMAP.
Timothy Murphy wrote: > As far as I can see, KMail's maildir format > (with folders ~/Mail/inbox/cur , etc) > is incompatible with Dovecot's IMAP format > (with folders ~/Mail/.inbox/cur).
> I mean that if one runs an IMAP server > then the directories must be in Dovecot's format, > in which case they cannot be accessed by kmail running on the server > with a standard Local Account.
> If that is indeed the case, > it seems surprising that kmail documentation > does not appear to contain any warning of this.
> On the other hand, if I am wrong, I would be very grateful > if someone could explain how one can combine kmail + dovecot IMAP.
Hi Tim,
As far as I know the KMail's Maildir follows the original Maildir format from Daniel J. Bernstein's qmail, I will check to see if there are any variants but as far as I can see it does seem to use the directory structure.
If I get some time off tomorrow I could try to implement Maildir++ along side the existing Maindir support.
>> As far as I can see, KMail's maildir format >> (with folders ~/Mail/inbox/cur , etc) >> is incompatible with Dovecot's IMAP format >> (with folders ~/Mail/.inbox/cur).
>> I mean that if one runs an IMAP server >> then the directories must be in Dovecot's format, >> in which case they cannot be accessed by kmail running on the server >> with a standard Local Account.
>> If that is indeed the case, >> it seems surprising that kmail documentation >> does not appear to contain any warning of this.
>> On the other hand, if I am wrong, I would be very grateful >> if someone could explain how one can combine kmail + dovecot IMAP.
> Hi Tim,
> As far as I know the KMail's Maildir follows the original Maildir format > from Daniel J. Bernstein's qmail, I will check to see if there are any > variants but as far as I can see it does seem to use the directory > structure.
> If I get some time off tomorrow I could try to implement Maildir++ along > side the existing Maindir support.
Thanks, let us know how you get on.
After looking at the rather confusing documentation on the subject of Maildir and Maildir++, as far as I can see the original Maildir format used 3 directories, ~/Mail/[cur,new,tmp]/ .
The problems arose when subfolders of the Mail directory were introduced. The Maildir format used in kmail follows what seems to me the natural extension, with directories ~/Mail/inbox/[cur,new,tmp]/ , etc. These are not seen by an IMAP client, at least with dovecot.
The Maildir++ format, for reasons which escape me, has directories ~/Mail/.inbox/[cur,new,tmp]/ . These cannot be seen by local kmail, at least as a local account.
If this is wrong, please correct me. Also I would be interested to know why Maildir++ adopted this "dotty" system.
Timothy Murphy wrote: > Thanks, let us know how you get on.
> < snip >
> The Maildir++ format, for reasons which escape me, > has directories ~/Mail/.inbox/[cur,new,tmp]/ . > These cannot be seen by local kmail, at least as a local account.
> If this is wrong, please correct me. > Also I would be interested to know why Maildir++ > adopted this "dotty" system.
Well if I remember correctly the `courier` project ( courier-imap ) or it's author is the brains behind the Maindir++ spec, they needed something that could support sub-folders, mail quotas and still be a little compatible with the original Maildir; the `.` prefix is used to hide subfolders from the mail root.
Now their is one problem I noticed, if I implement it as a local account type the data will be moved into `~/.kde/share/apps/kmail`, this will render the folder structure and your IMAP service useless. I will have to base the new account type on the Disconnected IMAP account and that might take a little longer.
>> The Maildir++ format, for reasons which escape me, >> has directories ~/Mail/.inbox/[cur,new,tmp]/ . >> These cannot be seen by local kmail, at least as a local account.
>> If this is wrong, please correct me. >> Also I would be interested to know why Maildir++ >> adopted this "dotty" system.
> Well if I remember correctly the `courier` project ( courier-imap ) or > it's author is the brains behind the Maindir++ spec, they needed something > that could support sub-folders, mail quotas and still be a little > compatible with the original Maildir; the `.` prefix is used to hide > subfolders from the mail root.
Sorry but I just don't follow the logic. If one uses kmail (local account) to create new folders, using maildir format, they are called something like ~/Mail/Folder1 , ~/Mail/Folder2, etc, and each contains the subdirectories cur,new,tmp in which email messages are stored. This does not seem to cause any problem at all.
> Now their is one problem I noticed, if I implement it as a local account > type the data will be moved into `~/.kde/share/apps/kmail`, this will > render the folder structure and your IMAP service useless. I will have to > base the new account type on the Disconnected IMAP account and that might > take a little longer.
I don't really understand this, but let us know how you get on.
> Sorry but I just don't follow the logic. > If one uses kmail (local account) to create new folders, > using maildir format, they are called something like > ~/Mail/Folder1 , ~/Mail/Folder2, etc, > and each contains the subdirectories cur,new,tmp > in which email messages are stored. > This does not seem to cause any problem at all.
Well to put it simply in Maildir++ all subdirectory levels are separated by `.`. for example `~/Maildir/.inbox.family` is displayed as `inbox/family` and so on.
> Well to put it simply in Maildir++ all subdirectory levels are separated > by `.`. for example `~/Maildir/.inbox.family` is displayed as > `inbox/family` and so on.
I understand that perfectly well. What I don't understand is WHY. Why not just use subdirectories like everyone else ...?
